Condit v. United Air Lines, Inc., 76-2296
| Decision Date | 28 July 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-2296,76-2296 |
| Citation | 558 F.2d 1176 |
| Parties | 14 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 7752 Karen CONDIT and Mary E. Oravec, Appellants, v. UNITED AIR LINES, INC., Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Martin J. Flynn, Washington, D. C. (Wendy S. White, Shea & Gardner, Washington, D. C., on brief), for appellants.
Kenneth A. Knutson, Chicago, Ill. (Joseph A. Rafferty, Jr., Washington, D. C., and Earl G. Dolan, Chicago, Ill., on brief), for appellee.
Abner W. Sibal, Gen. Counsel, Joseph T. Eddins, Jr., Associate Gen. Counsel, Lutz Alexander Prager and Marilyn S. G. Urwitz, Attys., Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Washington, D. C., on brief as amicus curiae.
Before WINTER, BUTZNER and HALL, Circuit Judges.
Karen Condit, a stewardess representing a class composed of herself and all others similarly situated, and Mary E. Oravec, an intervenor, appeal from an order of the district court holding that the maternity leave policy of United Air Lines, Inc., constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification under § 703(e) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e)). We affirm.
United requires that all stewardesses discontinue flying as soon as they become aware that they are pregnant. The stewardesses contend that each stewardess should be allowed to continue working as long as she can safely perform her duties.
The district court found, on conflicting expert testimony, that pregnancy could incapacitate a stewardess in ways that might threaten the safe operation of aircraft. It therefore concluded that United's policy of refusing to allow stewardesses to fly from the time they learned they were pregnant was consistent with a common carrier's duty to exercise the highest degree of care for the safety of its passengers. *
The district court's ruling that United's policy is a bona fide occupational qualification is based on findings of fact which, on the evidence presented by this record, are not clearly erroneous. Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
* In the only other reported case on the subject that has been brought to our attention, the court held that a pregnant stewardess can be automatically barred from flying under the bona fide occupational qualification rationale only after the twentieth week. In re National Airlines, Inc., Maternity Leave Practices and Flight Attendant Weight Program Litigation, 434 F.Supp. 269 (S.D.Fla.197...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Murnane v. American Airlines, Inc.
...with "the highest possible degree" of care for the safety of its passengers. 49 U.S.C. § 1421(b) (1976). See Condit v. United Air Lines, Inc., 558 F.2d 1176 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 934, 98 S.Ct. 1510, 55 L.Ed.2d 531 (1978). Heeding that duty, the airline industry has over th......
-
Harriss v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc.
....... No. C-74-1884-WWS. . United States District Court, N. D. California. . September 2, 1977. 437 F. ...139, 97 S.Ct. 409. . 34 Sprogis v. United Air Lines, Inc., 444 F.2d 1194 (7th Cir., 1971) (no-marriage rule for female flight .... 44 The Fourth Circuit recently decided Condit v. United Airlines Inc., 13 F.E.P. 689 (1976), aff'd, 558 F.2d 1176 . 76-2296, July 28, 1977), which reached the same conclusion. The circuit court ......
-
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Uaw v. Johnson Controls, Inc
...Air Lines, Inc., 633 F.2d 361 (CA4 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 965, 101 S.Ct. 1480, 67 L.Ed.2d 613 (1981); Condit v. United Air Lines, Inc., 558 F.2d 1176 (CA4 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 934, 98 S.Ct. 1510, 55 L.Ed.2d 531 (1978); In re National Airlines, Inc., 434 F.Supp. 249 (S.D.Fla.......
-
Burwell v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc.
...to be in conflict with the holding of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Condit v. United Air Lines, Inc., 558 F.2d 1176 (4th Cir. 1977) (per curiam) cert. denied, 435 U.S. 934, 98 S.Ct. 1510, 55 L.Ed.2d 531 (1978). That case involved a Title VII challenge to Unite......